Ask Me Help Desk

Ask Me Help Desk (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/forum.php)
-   Current Events (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/forumdisplay.php?f=486)
-   -   General Petraus resignation from CIA (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=715609)

  • Nov 14, 2012, 07:23 PM
    tomder55
    I've laid out the facts .here is some corraborating links (there are plenty in open source )
    The President is secretly aiding the Syrian rebels :
    Exclusive: Obama authorizes secret U.S. support for Syrian rebels | Reuters
    Quote:

    A U.S. government source acknowledged that under provisions of the presidential finding, the United States was collaborating with a secret command center operated by Turkey and its allies.
    The Slimes also reported it.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/wo...anted=all&_r=0

    The Slimes also reported that the bulk of weapons flowing into Syria are going to jihadist groups
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/15/wo...pagewanted=all
    Some of the weapons they've acquired are SAMs
    Rebels forcing Syrian jets to bomb from high altitude - France | Reuters

    The question you pose has bothered me too . I had heard one theory about the attack being a false flag operation by jihadists sympathetic to Iran and Syria. But I'm rethinking that in light of the Broadwell revelation (info she obtained from Petraeus ) that the CIA station was holding prisoners. What if the attack was to free them or to take hostages for an exchange ?
  • Nov 14, 2012, 07:58 PM
    paraclete
    If they held prisioners it could well have caused an attack to free them, but no mention of freed prisioners, not like a jihadist group not to crow. I think the attack was opportunist, the jihadists couldn't believe their luck but we should understand the attitude to american boots on the ground in Libya and we should understand that a lot is going on across the border in Mali. There was also action taken on local groups after the attack so it is easy to blame jihadists. You don't have a lot of friends in Africa you know
  • Nov 15, 2012, 02:53 AM
    tomder55
    Except the group that claimed responsibility is AQ linked ;it happened on 9-11 as was the other coordinated demo in front of the Cairo Embassy(which also had nothing to do with a video) ;and the head of AQ called for revenge because our drone took out the Libyan born 2nd in command at AQ . There was no mention of freed prisoners because there weren't any . The CIA held their position . And CIA ops thwarted any kidnapping when they intervened .
  • Nov 15, 2012, 05:57 AM
    paraclete
    Yes the CIA held their position and got the ambassador killed, very heroic
  • Nov 15, 2012, 06:00 AM
    tomder55
    Lol if you want to blame anyone for Ambassador Stevens death ;blame the idiots who decided to outsource his security detail so the US would not have a heavy footprint.
  • Nov 15, 2012, 07:59 AM
    speechlesstx
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    the sexual angle is a side show .it does the adm a favor by diverting from the bigger stories related to Benghazi .

    Yessiree. Some reported asked McCain yesterday if the Petraeus affair was a bigger national security concern than Benghazi. He responded of course...

    Quote:

    “Well, I say with great respect, that’s one of the dumbest questions I’ve ever heard. Okay? There’s four dead Americans. Four dead Americans. Not a socialite. I’m answering your question. Do you want me to answer your question or do you wanna interrupt? Which do you want? There’s four dead Americans. The lives of other Americans were put in jeopardy,” McCain said. “It’s certainly a national security issues, but it doesn’t rise to the level of four dead Americans.”
    Been making that point myself and I'm still floored by the nonchalant attitude expressed over that point.
  • Nov 15, 2012, 08:32 AM
    tomder55
    Acting DCI Michael Morell will testify today that the reason there was no military aid during the attack is because the CIA only requested an un-armed drone to survey the scene. He will lie and say that they thought the attack was over when the CIA agents evacuated the mission and there was a lull before the CIA building came under attack . He ignores the fact that the CIA vehicles came under attack on their way back to the CIA compound. During that lull ;the enemy was able to vector in mortars that proved deadly later . He will also make the claim that the agents on the ground NEVER asked for assistance.
  • Nov 15, 2012, 01:14 PM
    speechlesstx
    And did you catch Obama protectin' his wimmen?

    "If Sen. McCain and Sen. Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. When they go after the U.N. ambassador apparently because they think she's an easy target, then they've got a problem with me."

    Can Sen Ayotte go after her without ruffling your chauvinistic feathers Mr. President?

    And then of all things comes this jaw dropper, "I'm happy to have that discussion with them. But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador? Who had nothing to do with Benghazi?"

    So why didn't any of those hardcore journalists ask him why they sent her out on 5 Sunday talk shows as the admin's lead on Benghazi if she had nothing to do with Benghazi?

    Answer, they were too busy fawning over him...
  • Nov 15, 2012, 03:33 PM
    paraclete
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    lol if you want to blame anyone for Ambassador Stevens death ;blame the idiots who decided to outsource his security detail so the US would not have a heavy footprint.

    You mean to say the US is incapable of hiring mercenaries? What no Delta force hiding in the shubbery? Some times this becomes so pathetic I have to wonder are you serious?
  • Nov 15, 2012, 03:59 PM
    speechlesstx
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    you mean to say the US is incapable of hiring mercenaries? what no Delta force hiding in the shubbery? some times this becomes so pathetic I have to wonder are you serious?

    Dude, when did you get the impression that the Obama administration had any level of competence?
  • Nov 15, 2012, 04:25 PM
    paraclete
    About the time they took out OBL
  • Nov 15, 2012, 05:18 PM
    tomder55
    My information is that the President had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the situation room... that the call to wack OBL was made without his input.
  • Nov 15, 2012, 06:11 PM
    paraclete
    Be that as it may, and he may have trusted wiser heads than his, the job got done, and the leader takes the credit as well as the kicks.
  • Nov 16, 2012, 05:10 AM
    tomder55
    Should be interesting what Petraeus says in testimony today . The Obots are letting the press establish the narrative that Benghazi is an agency failure . If he comes clean then the news will be that this was an op run internally in the WH... using foreign funding (primarily Saudi )so the President can get around accountability to Congress (ala Iran-Contra) .

    Found out that his wife was installed in a plum $187,605-per-yer job; in the newly formed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB);a bass turd child of the Dodd-Frank law .Holly Petraeus is the assistant director for the Office of Servicemember Affairs ,a posting that did not require Senate confirmation (also funding for CFPB comes from the Federal Reserve and does not require Congressional oversight) .She was appointed by the new Sen from Mass. Elizabeth Warren when Warren was setting up the agency .

    So the Obots still hold some leverage over the General.
  • Nov 16, 2012, 05:37 AM
    paraclete
    It is reported as closed doors, so unlikely you will get the full story, what you are saying is we have Saudi-Lybia affair, but the saudi's can give aid to Libya without a by your leave
  • Nov 16, 2012, 07:42 AM
    speechlesstx
    Reportedly he intends to testify that he knew it was terrorism "almost immediately", that he had his own talking points and that those that Rice went out with came from somewhere else in the administration.
  • Nov 16, 2012, 08:22 AM
    tomder55
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    It is reported as closed doors, so unlikely you will get the full story, what you are saying is we have Saudi-Lybia affair, but the saudi's can give aid to Lybia without a by your leave

    What's your point ?Of course they could.. But the President CAN'T do it without foreign money unless he reports to Congress about the operation.
  • Nov 16, 2012, 10:17 AM
    talaniman
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by speechlesstx View Post
    Reportedly he intends to testify that he knew it was terrorism "almost immediately", that he had his own talking points and that those that Rice went out with came from somewhere else in the administration.

    From somewhere else in the CIA, as the general has already said he had to verify his suspicions further.
  • Nov 16, 2012, 10:21 AM
    tomder55
    The video was a ruse ;even in Cairo .
  • Nov 16, 2012, 10:25 AM
    talaniman
    Maybe it was but the ruse worked thruout the 22 embassys in the muslim world.
  • Nov 16, 2012, 10:30 AM
    tomder55
    Yup ;and there will be other days of rage now that Israel has gotten tired of the barrage of missiles out of Gaza . But the day of rage won't be against Hamas and Islamic Jihad (the Iranian based terror organization that is launching the Iranian supplied Fajr-5 solid fuel missiles aimed at Tel Aviv ). It will be about Israel defending itself.
    As Ex says ;none of this is happening in a vacume.
  • Nov 16, 2012, 11:40 AM
    talaniman
    Its been a mess for centuries. A spark will ignite a raging fire for all affected. No good guy here no matter what they say. They both get burned in the end.
  • Nov 16, 2012, 03:20 PM
    paraclete
    I think it is clear who has been the provocateur, no doubt there are a lot of bystanders who are going to suffer but it cannot be allowed to continue. When you are at war even a small war force must be used
  • Nov 19, 2012, 10:29 AM
    speechlesstx
    The White House was definitely briefed that Benghazi was a terrorist attack within 72 hours. Game over on these lame defenses from Obama - the Obama administration duped the voters and intentionally sent Susan Rice out to lie to the American people.

    Quote:

    BREAKING: The president knew the truth about Benghazi
    By Jennifer Rubin

    In a blockbuster report, John Solomon, the former Associated Press and Post reporter, has ferreted out the president’s daily brief that informed him within 72 hours of the Sept. 11 attack that the Benghazi attack was a jihadist operation.

    Citing officials directly familiar with the information, Solomon writes in the Washington Guardian that Obama and other administration officials were told that “that the attack was likely carried out by local militia and other armed extremists sympathetic to al-Qaida in the region.”

    He adds:

    The details from the CIA and Pentagon assessments of the killing of Ambassador Chris [Stevens] were far more specific, more detailed and more current than the unclassified talking points that UN Ambassador Susan Rice and other officials used five days after the attack to suggest to Americans that an unruly mob angry over an anti-Islamic video was to blame, officials said.

    Most of the details affirming al-Qaida links were edited or excluded from the unclassified talking points used by Rice in appearances on news programs the weekend after the attack, officials confirmed Friday. Multiple agencies were involved in excising information, doing so because it revealed sources and methods, dealt with classified intercepts or involved information that was not yet fully confirmed, the officials said.

    Solomon cautions that there were bits of evidence pointing to a spontaneous attack but, as Eli Lake of the Daily Beast and others have reported, he writes: “Among the early evidence cited in the briefings to the president and other senior officials were intercepts showing some of the participants were known members or supporters of Ansar al-Sharia — the al-Qaida-sympathizing militia in Libya — and the AQIM, which is a direct affiliate of al-Qaida in northern Africa, the officials said.”

    How could the president and his senior staff then have allowed (or rather, sent) Rice to go out to tell an entirely different tale to the American people on Sept. 16 on five TV shows?

    This report indicates that the president certainly knew that Benghazi wasn’t a rogue movie review gone bad. He had information that plainly spelled out what was later confirmed by additional intelligence. If this information was too confidential to share with the public, at the very least the president and others should not have mislead voters.

    This is a full-blown scandal, and in light of this information, the press corps’s slothful indifference to uncovering the truth at Wednesday’s news conference with Obama is all the more shocking
    . It is time for the president to come clean. The scandal has now enveloped the Oval Office and will define his second term, if not resolved satisfactorily.
    What did he know and when did he know it? Answered. When will the media pick up on this? Will they hold his feet to the fire? That remains to be seen.
  • Nov 19, 2012, 10:38 AM
    Wondergirl
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by speechlesstx View Post
    When will the media pick up on this? Will they hold his feet to the fire? That remains to be seen.

    Why does the American public have a right to know this instantaneously, as soon as he does?
  • Nov 19, 2012, 10:57 AM
    tomder55
    It's debatable ,although I think we absolutely need and deserve the truth about the murder of an American ambassador But that is not the issue. We were misled and lied to ;and they tried to maintain that false narrative despite it unravelling around them.
    As you may have noticed;I am convinced that the lie was concocted to cover a much bigger policy failure that makes the narrative that it was about the election a minor issue in comparison.
  • Nov 19, 2012, 11:07 AM
    Wondergirl
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    a much bigger policy failure

    And that was?
  • Nov 19, 2012, 12:40 PM
    tomder55
    Well maybe not a failure... but one of those policies that you think we shouldn't know about. A policy that the President didn't want Congress to know about for that matter . It involves recruiting and arming anti-Assad 'rebels '. The mission in Benghazi( it has never been called a consulate by the White House ) was the base of the operation.
  • Nov 19, 2012, 12:47 PM
    Wondergirl
    We couldn't have done anything about it anyway. And it was a security issue.
  • Nov 19, 2012, 12:52 PM
    tomder55
    Maybe ;maybe not . But that doesn't change that the adm had a compelling reason to cover it up .
  • Nov 19, 2012, 02:19 PM
    Wondergirl
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    maybe ;maybe not . But that doesn't change that the adm had a compelling reason to cover it up .

    But maybe that is not what was happening. Just because I don't tell my adult children something right away doesn't mean I am covering it up.
  • Nov 19, 2012, 02:29 PM
    paraclete
    Unless you tell them something completely different
  • Nov 19, 2012, 02:34 PM
    Wondergirl
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    unless you tell them something completely different

    "Yes, your father and I fight a lot" vs. "Yes, your father and I are getting a divorce."
  • Nov 19, 2012, 02:40 PM
    tomder55
    No ; the least of it was political . One week before the President danced on OBLs grave and said AQ was on the run. He was never going to admit that AQ hit us on the anniverary of the 9-11 attack.
    But he would've survived that . There was something deeper ;something that required foreign financing so he could keep the operation hidden from the Congressional Intelligence Committees.
  • Nov 19, 2012, 02:47 PM
    paraclete
    Congressional intelligence isn't that an oxymoron somewhat similar to military intelligence
  • Nov 19, 2012, 02:54 PM
    talaniman
    If the ambassador or anyone was so concerned over the lax security of a previouly besieged mission/consulate, what was he doing there without his security detail? Least we forget the ambassador to Syria among the Syrian people a year or so ago.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/13/wo...pagewanted=all

    Quote:

    Benghazi residents circulated photographs online of Mr. Stevens frequenting local restaurants, relishing local dishes, and strolling city streets, apparently without a security detail.

    On Wednesday, some friends of Mr. Stevens suggested that his faith in his bond with the people of Benghazi may have blinded him to the dangers there.
  • Nov 19, 2012, 03:04 PM
    Wondergirl
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    There was something deeper ;something that required foreign financing so he could keep the operation hidden from the Congressional Intelligence Committees.

    And you and I were doing so well...
  • Nov 19, 2012, 03:41 PM
    speechlesstx
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Wondergirl View Post
    But maybe that is not what was happening. Just because I don't tell my adult children something right away doesn't mean I am covering it up.

    The point is, with my last post it's more than obvious Obama intentionally lied to us. Why?

    People died, Obama lied.
  • Nov 19, 2012, 03:46 PM
    Wondergirl
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by speechlesstx View Post
    The point is, with my last post it's more than obvious Obama intentionally lied to us. Why?

    People died, Obama lied.

    So if he would have filled us in from the get-go, no one would have died?
  • Nov 19, 2012, 04:21 PM
    tomder55
    Quote:

    what was he doing there without his security detail?
    yes ask yourself why the Ambassador in a hot zone was not assigned a security detail commensurate with the threat matrix . Why did the State Dept rely on locals for the Ambassador's security ? Why would he risk going to Benghazi on the anniversary of 9-11 to meet with the Turkish envoy ,and why was the Ambassador there when every other western nation had bugged out of Bengazi because it was unsafe. Then ask yourself ;was the Ambassador really conducting a diplomatic mission?. this Ambassador who's previous job was to coordinate and arm anti-QDaffy forces .

  • All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:28 PM.